CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

tooluniverse-cancer-variant-interpretation

Clinical interpretation of somatic cancer mutations for precision oncology. Transforms a gene + variant + cancer-type input into an actionable report: clinical evidence tier (CIViC, OncoKB), therapeutic options (FDA-approved + investigational), resistance mechanisms, prognosis, and matching clinical trials. Use for tumor-board variant calls, somatic-mutation actionability assessment, and treatment selection. Always cancer-type-specific.

68

Quality

81%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

The canonical home for this skill is tooluniverse-cancer-variant-interpretation in mims-harvard/ToolUniverse

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

71%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A well-organized, action-oriented body with verified tool parameters and a clear phased workflow, weakened primarily by a broken external reference to a missing ANALYSIS_DETAILS.md that holds the promised code snippets.

Suggestions

Add the referenced ANALYSIS_DETAILS.md to the skill bundle (or inline the key code snippets) so the 'see ANALYSIS_DETAILS.md' pointer resolves to real content.

Tighten the Clinical Reasoning Strategies prose into terser bullet criteria to lift conciseness toward the lean anchor.

Add an explicit per-phase validate/retry note (e.g., confirm a CIViC match before tiering) so the workflow's checkpoints are as explicit as its sequence.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient: tables, terse principles, and offloaded code snippets keep the body lean, with only minor stretches of prose in the reasoning-strategy sections that could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete and executable in most places — verified tool parameter tables and an exact ESM_explain_variant_mechanism call signature — but the bulk of copy-paste code is deferred to a referenced file rather than shown inline.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced 8-phase workflow with an explicit Phase 0 parameter-verification checkpoint and a Fallback Strategy for error recovery; checkpoints are present though not articulated as a per-phase validate/retry loop.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Good internal section structure, but the single one-level-deep reference ('see ANALYSIS_DETAILS.md') points to a file that is not present in the bundle, so the intended content split is unrealized and navigation is broken.

3 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

92%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A specific, well-scoped third-person description that explicitly covers both capability and trigger conditions with concrete, domain-appropriate language. The only minor gap is slightly less exhaustive enumeration of trigger synonyms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'clinical evidence tier (CIViC, OncoKB), therapeutic options (FDA-approved + investigational), resistance mechanisms, prognosis, and matching clinical trials' — giving comprehensive coverage of the report's components.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (transforms gene+variant+cancer-type into an actionable report with named sections) and 'when' ('Use for tumor-board variant calls, somatic-mutation actionability assessment, and treatment selection.').

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Strong natural trigger phrases ('tumor-board variant calls', 'somatic-mutation actionability assessment', 'treatment selection', 'precision oncology'), though a few common synonyms a clinician might verbalize are not all enumerated.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche (somatic cancer variant interpretation for precision oncology) with distinct triggers and the 'Always cancer-type-specific' qualifier minimizing conflict with broader skills.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
mims-harvard/ToolUniverse
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.